Little bit about mark c johnson. Hes the author books and a u. S. Senate history and a frequent commentator on american and political history. Mr. Johnson is also a fellow, the Mansfield Center for the university, montana. His work has appeared the new york times, the Washington Post, the bulwark, california journal, politics and public policy. Montana. The magazine of western history and the indiana magazine of history. He is a columnist for the lewiston tribune. Idaho, and writes regularly on the blog many things considered. His previous books for the university of Oklahoma Press are tuesday massacre for Senate Elections and the radicalization of the republican party, a study of how independent campaigns upended american politics after 1980 and political hellraiser a biography of montana new deal era senator Burton K Wheeler and that is a spur Award Finalist by the western writers of johnson served as a press as the press secretary and chief of staff to idahos longest serving governor, cecil d andrus, and is a graduate of south dakota state university. He lives in oregon. Please help me welcome mark c johnson. Thank you. Thank you, suzanne. Appreciate the lewis and clark library. This event tonight. Its good to see you and thanks to my friends from the local independent bookstore, Montana Book Company for being here tonight, weve been on a whirlwind tour across montana and its been great. What a privilege it is to visit the state that sent Mike Mansfield to the United States senate four different times. If you know anything about books, you know that its a Community Event requires many different people contributing the scholars and historians whose work you rely upon to try to get the straight, the people who are willing to talk to you about the subject, the archivists and the librarians help you find the records. And in my case, my editor in chief, my marketing director, my Vice President , dr. Trish johnson. Now, thats hard for me to believe, that tomorrow she will have stuck with me for 38 years. Were celebrating our wedding anniversary tomorrow by listening to me give a speech. So there you are. In all seriousness. Tricia is operated photocopy being machines from missoula to atlanta. The Carter Library from the the fdr library in hyde park, new york, to the state archives in phenix, arizona. She knows her way around these libraries and has found some wonderful that has found its way into my books books. The first line of my book, mansfield and dirksen, giants of the senate is pretty simple. It says this is a story, a United States senate that no longer exists. I set out write this book because i really did want to write about Mike Mansfield even that don opendoor for a really great reporter for the Washington Post for many years had written an open door for sadly to say is no longer with us. But don wrote the definitive biography of Mike Mansfield there was nothing could do that would improve upon that. He had an opportunity to spend hours and hours with the senator doing interviews and you know really probing mansfields personality and substance. So i to find a different angle to approach mansfields story and it was sort of by serendipity that i came upon the relationship that exists between mansfield and his republican counterpart in senate, Everett Dirksen from illinois. So the book really focuses the period from early in 1961 when Mike Mansfield becomes the senate leader, replacing Lyndon Johnson and all the way through the sixties until death in 1969. Few montanans know that Mike Mansfield remains the longest serving leader in the senates history a truly phenomenal public. Another great. Washington post reporter and columnist broder said, was the greatest american he had ever met. And its pretty high praise coming from a guy who covered every president from eisenhower to barack obama. So i what i set out to try to write a new interpretation, if you will, of mansfield, its importance to the senate as an institution and his absolute embrace of the idea of civility, comedy, a willingness to work across the political divide, mutual respect, and a word that he two words that he often used selfrestraint, political selfrestraint. How do you exercise the power you have and not abuse it . How do you make the institution of the senate function correctly . One of the theories that i brought to the book and i hope the book proves the theory that both of these guys were what i call Senate Institute analysts, meaning that they really, in the institution of the senate. Mansfield was often quoted saying he had three great loves. His wife, maureen montana, and the senate. So these guys really had respect for this institution. And admittedly a very quirky institute, even if i were to say United States senate to you today, what words would normally first come to mind. Aquaman. Dysfunction, maybe hyper partizanship, getting nothing done. Frequent common in the press about the senate just not working very well. I was struck reading a piece in the atlantic magazine recently by mckay coppins, who is produced a new book on utah senator mitt romney. And romney kind of unburdened himself over the course of many months, talking the atlantic reporter about his life in the senate and how really unsavory it was in so many respects in essence, romney said, you know, most of what happens in the senate is just posturing to, get on tv to create 12 or 15. Second soundbite that winds up on a twitter feed somewhere and that the greatest deliberative body in the world hardly ever deliberates. The speeches on the senate floor are usually given to an empty chamber and often focus on a piece of legislation that everyone knows is not going to pass. So thats the senate that unfortunately has come to bin the 21st century. You to realize this is the most institution perhaps anywhere in a western with the possible exception of the british house of lords. Every state has, two representatives in the Senate Without regard to population as James Madison wrote in the federalist paper 62. There no disarray of each state having two senators had no basis democratic theory, but was merely an expedient to get the small states to originally embrace the constitution and come into the union. So as a result, wyoming. Has 585,000 residents. Have the same number of senators as. 39 million resident. But thats the way the senate is structured. Thats in the constitution. There are quirky rules in senate. The unlimited debate rule requiring a supermajority vote of 60 votes. Now to cut off debate, to move to almost any decision the senate often operates on consent, which is difficult to get as you can tell by a former auburn football coach who is now happens to be a senator from alabama who is holding up literally 300 or more top military appointments because hes put a hold on them over a dispute with the biden administration. So all of these quirky rules and the fact that the worlds deliberative body, as its been called, no longer really deliberates is the senate that we have now. Mansfield and dirksen understood rules. They understood the limits notions that are built into the constitu version and somehow they figured out how to make the senate work in that period when. They shared leadership in the 1960s. And can tell by the demographic in the room that of you are old enough to remember the decade of the sixties. It was not the beatles or, the summer of love or sending a man to the moon and returning safely to earth. It was a very tumultuous time in our country. Civil rights protests in the south. Across the country. Church bombings in birmingham that claimed the lives four young africanamerican girls college. Literally murdered. Four going to the south to simply to help black americans get registered to vote. There were Great International tensions. The cuban missile crisis. The bay of pigs at the beginning of the kennedy administration. And you know, really the the beginning, if you will of a really intense period of cold war between the united and the soviet union. So by historical standards it wasnt a pleasant time at all. Yet somehow during the that period when mansfield dirksen were in leadership, they accomplished some amazing feats of legislative some major legislative accomplishments that if we look at them, with the hindsight of today, really, truly, truly do seem remarkable. Let me talk just a little bit about these two guys utterly personalities. Dirksen was flamboyant an actor as, a young man. He really wanted to be an actor. He wrote about 100 plays as a young man. None of which were published. But he really enjoyed the limelight. He wanted to be on the stage. Finally, his mother convinced him that he could not make a living doing that. It wasnt an honorable profession. So he went into politics. Show business by other means, perhaps. But he he cultivated a certain persona as a senator, as a politician, a political figure that makes him think unlike anybody in our politic today, he had an unruly mop of white hair that almost always needed a comb run through it. His suit jackets typically were two or three sizes too big, so he looked kind of schlumpy most of the time. But he had a great voice. One reporter dubbed him the wizard of ooze, and that that stuck. Others referred to his honey tonsils. He could one heck of a political speech, perhaps the most distinctive voice at the time, with the exception of John Kennedys boston twang or, a boston brogue or Lyndon Johnsons hill country twang. He was a superb orator. Never one to use ten words when a hundred would work better. The photo shows in one of his favorite poses. He would actually climb up on top of desk in his office for his Weekly News Conference with capitol reporters, set their buddha like crosslegged, smoking a cigaret, taking questions from reporters. As i said, mansfield the polar opposite shy, quiet, ramrod straight. Perhaps a function of marine corps training. A College History professor. The university of montana. Before politics an expert in asian history and remarkably, seemingly devoid of all ego and the need for publicity. Once on the abc program issues and answers in space of a 30 minute interview, Mike Mansfield answered 62 separate questions. Many with a simple yap or nope. An with i havent the faintest. Reporters loved him. And unlike virtually every other politician then and now, he was generally genuinely publicity shy. I have a story in the book about an interview that mansfield did with neal mcneil, who was a Time Magazine correspondent many years on capitol hill and he tells the story of pulling mansfield off the senate floor at one point to tell him that the editors of time had decided, put as he put it, mansfield mansfields face on mount rushmore. They were going to put him on the cover of Time Magazine. And mansfield said, well thats awful. How can we stop that . He did not literally did not want the publicity, but he did wind up on the cover of Time Magazine. This was in 1964. If you can see the banner in the upper corner of the photo of the cover, it asks the question democrats control a democratic senate. This was a period in which the senate was launching into what would become the extended debate over the Civil Rights Act of 64 . Dirksen contrast loved the press attention and. I would argue that mansfield understood the importance of dirksens public and made the most of it in terms of giving him the opportunity to be the Senate Spokesman on issues like civil rights and Voting Rights. Again, this is this is from the book. Dirksen became so skillful and so comfortable in his often spontaneous dealings with washington reporters that he would often climb on top of a desk. Cbs correspond note roger mudd, who covered the epic filibuster against the Civil Rights Act in 1964, watched dirksen during the day after day. During momentous period. As he put it, maneuver, wheedle. Dissent cajole. Bargain. Beg and borrow. And admitted. And roger mudd admitted. The senator developed an intimacy that at times came close to crossing the line that ought to separate the press from a politicians, from a. On one occasion, dirksen joked with reporters and i quote, ive decided to become dull, morose and boring these press meetings. Its the only course you give me no choice. I tell the joke and you convert it into an international incident. I coin a whimsical term and you make appear that im at odds with the president. I indulge in some polite banter, and you interpret it as a split in the party. I engage in bit of twaddle and it becomes a crisis. I inject a bit of flap doodle into our pleasant relationship. And i get on the front page. You have an unsafe breed. From now on, i shall become the consummate bore. I shall be insufferably dull and blase. I shall turn aside questions with a shrug or a grunt or a profound or a no comment. You only have yourselves to blame. Of course, he couldnt keep the pledge. So. So too. Just go further into the mansfield and dirksen relations. Nothing exemplifies ability of these guys to Work Together on a bipartisan in a bipartisan. Then the senates historic passage in 1964 of the civil rights, an act that for the First Time Since the war tempted to legislate out of our system. Segregation to make it possible for all americans to have to be treated equally in terms of accommodate in public spaces and not to be discriminated against. It was hugely controversial. But consistent with the belief that dirksen had to be not only seen as influencing the civil rights if he was indeed going to be able to support it. Mansfield had to bully believe that dirksen had a obligation to. His republican colleagues to be not just appear to be a leader, but to be a real leader of the senate on this. So right from the beginning of the debate over civil in 1964, just to put this in a little context, president john dies in november of 1963, having introduced somewhat belatedly and that in the sense of many historians a civil rights. Lyndon johnson up that bill and pledges to carry on with kennedys and johnson being a master political realizes that the moment is right to really try to push this legislation forward. But enormous obstacles stand in his way not the least being the reluctance the unwillingness in fact, the the absolute opposition of southern segregationist democrat to the legislation, a major constituency of, Lyndon Johnsons democratic party. So in order for civil rights bill to pass in 1964 and later the Voting Rights act to pass in 1965, it was absolutely imperative that Mike Mansfield be able to work across the aisle and get republican votes that that Everett Dirksen can deliver. Ironically, as one historian has pointed out, mans field actually accumulated more political power in this by giving it away. Dirksen. He was held in higher regard across. The political aisle. His approach to civility modesty, fairness, candor. Even earned him more respect from the partizan across the partizan divide and his influence grew as gave responsibility for leadership to his republican colleague. This picture is emblematic of dirksens role in that period. So hes meeting with many the top leaders of the Civil Rights Movement in 1964, dr. Martin luther king james farmer thats walter ruther, the president of the united auto workers, a major benefactor. The Civil Rights Movement. And, of course, right in front of, dirksen is a very young john lewis, a future congressman from georgia. So dirksens in the middle of the picture now. Mansfield was meeting with these folks, too. But youll wont find a picture of him doing so. He believed it was absolutely imperative that the republican leader be seen across country speaking to the American Public on the benefits of civil rights. So mansfield gave dirksen the opportunity to maneuver within the republican caucus, knowing that he had to be seen as influencing the legislation, had to be seen as the person who was negotiating with president johnson in some cases had to be seen as the the person who was really leading the senate forward on this important issue. Now, i argue mansfield, had established the strategy. He knew how to get the piece of legislation passed, but the important and critical part of the strategy was to be able to ensure that there were votes enough to get it passed and ultimately dirksen lived up to his side of the in a grand way. He produced 27 of the 33 republicans in the senate at that time in favor of the civil rights bill. Interesting enough not barry goldwater, who was going to be everyone figured would be the republican president ial nomination in november. He would be the president ial candidate in 1964 against johnson. Dirksen was quoted in his speech kind of bringing the Civil Rights Act to a climax. The debate to a climax. He quoted victor as stronger than. All the armies is an idea. Has an idea whose time has come. Now people have gone back and tried. Find that exact quote from victor hugo. And he didnt really say it that way. But one one historian has argued that dirksen actually improved on victor hugo. Note of all the democratic no votes, as i mentioned earlier or alluded to earlier, came from the states of the old confederacy, prompting Lynd